The three sisters went to ladies' night at Fur Nightclub in the District, as they had virtually every Sunday night, walking two blocks from their apartment in Tyler House to listen to go-go music and wrap up a busy week of school and work.

18, 19, and 20 year old sisters at a club at 2am on a Monday morning. And the mother is living with them in subsidized housing because they are "so poor". I'm gonna go ahead and guess none of them have jobs, because if they did they could afford to live in a non-subsidized housing in a nice neighborhood if they had 4 incomes coming in, even if they were only making minimum wage.

Walker:18, 19, and 20 year old sisters at a club at 2am on a Monday morning. And the mother is living with them in subsidized housing because they are "so poor". I'm gonna go ahead and guess none of them have jobs, because if they did they could afford to live in a non-subsidized housing in a nice neighborhood if they had 4 incomes coming in, even if they were only making minimum wage.

On Tuesday, the mother said there will be no more Fur Nightclub for her daughters, two of whom are in college and the other is working.

Yeah, they sound like real scum. And just where did it say they were in subsidized housing?

But don't let that get in the way of your rage over blah welfare queens. 0BOOGER!!1

When it's man to man sabres at dawn, nobody (except the two ultra-violent idiots) gets hurt. And you can be classy as fark like Mark Twain and decline the duel.

That would require the "duelers" have a sense of honor... which is very rarely the case these days.

First, start with the women. If women don't fark men who don't duel, all straight men are now duelists. Next, target the gay men, same thing. Now ALL men are duelists.

Secondly, counter the counter culture. Offer legal benefits to dueling and increase penalties to non-dueling violence. In film and movies, make the duelists the cool heroes and the non-duelists the cowardly babyfarkers with chlamydia.

Thirdly, make it lucrative. Good duelists get professional status and their duels are televised on ESPN. Make it the new NBA.

If you set it up right, you'll see random violence like this drop right the fark down. Counterpoint: huge increase in non-random violence, but that's much preferable to kids getting shot by strangers.

here to help:Walker: 18, 19, and 20 year old sisters at a club at 2am on a Monday morning. And the mother is living with them in subsidized housing because they are "so poor". I'm gonna go ahead and guess none of them have jobs, because if they did they could afford to live in a non-subsidized housing in a nice neighborhood if they had 4 incomes coming in, even if they were only making minimum wage.

On Tuesday, the mother said there will be no more Fur Nightclub for her daughters, two of whom are in college and the other is working.

Yeah, they sound like real scum. And just where did it say they were in subsidized housing?

But don't let that get in the way of your rage over blah welfare queens. 0BOOGER!!1

Ooga booga racism aside..... Ftfa

The mother said she has called Tyler House, a subsidized community, home for 17 years. She said one of her daughters studies psychology at the University of the District of Columbia and another studies physical therapy at Virginia State University.

doglover:First, start with the women. If women don't fark men who don't duel, all straight men are now duelists. Next, target the gay men, same thing. Now ALL men are duelists.

Secondly, counter the counter culture. Offer legal benefits to dueling and increase penalties to non-dueling violence. In film and movies, make the duelists the cool heroes and the non-duelists the cowardly babyfarkers with chlamydia.

Thirdly, make it lucrative. Good duelists get professional status and their duels are televised on ESPN. Make it the new NBA.

If you set it up right, you'll see random violence like this drop right the fark down. Counterpoint: huge increase in non-random violence, but that's much preferable to kids getting shot by strangers.

Or they could end the drug war, invest in education, raise minimum wage, do something about the ghetto trap and tighten gun regulations in an intelligent (not reactionary) way to make it harder for these goons to get weapons.

Benjamin Orr:The mother said she has called Tyler House, a subsidized community, home for 17 years. She said one of her daughters studies psychology at the University of the District of Columbia and another studies physical therapy at Virginia State University.

I stand corrected but it sounds like they are breaking the cycle... or at least attempting to. Probably a scumbag father bailed and mom had no choice but to move into government housing. I should have added proper rent control in my reply to doglover. If people on minimum wage or forced to take welfare to care for their kids could afford places outside of the ghetto... well we wouldn't have as many young people getting sucked into ghetto bullsh*t.

here to help:Walker: 18, 19, and 20 year old sisters at a club at 2am on a Monday morning. And the mother is living with them in subsidized housing because they are "so poor". I'm gonna go ahead and guess none of them have jobs, because if they did they could afford to live in a non-subsidized housing in a nice neighborhood if they had 4 incomes coming in, even if they were only making minimum wage.

On Tuesday, the mother said there will be no more Fur Nightclub for her daughters, two of whom are in college and the other is working.

Yeah, they sound like real scum. And just where did it say they were in subsidized housing?

But don't let that get in the way of your rage over blah welfare queens. 0BOOGER!!1

Walker:18, 19, and 20 year old sisters at a club at 2am on a Monday morning. And the mother is living with them in subsidized housing because they are "so poor". I'm gonna go ahead and guess none of them have jobs, because if they did they could afford to live in a non-subsidized housing in a nice neighborhood if they had 4 incomes coming in, even if they were only making minimum wage.

Since we're making random, unsupported assumptions in this thread I'm going to guess that you are a poor white male who lives from check-to-check, but you still think you're in the middle class. Your father is an alcoholic construction worker who never really spent quality time with you because he was too busy threatening your mother to keep away from the neighbor that he suspects she was farking. You did poorly in school because you ran with a bunch of attractive and successful Caucasian-Americans who worshipped the WuTang Clan and smoked their mother's stolen cigarettes. You thought you were hard because you and your little crew used to intimidate other little white kids in the neighborhood but that stopped once you got to your integrated high school and you were around real black people. You studied them, mimicking their moves, their expressions, their slang...you even called your white friends "nubian" because you thought it made you edgy. But, there was always this distance between what you are and what you longed to be that troubled you. You could never get inside that circle and knowing it created a resentment. That resentment festered inside you as you got older and your view of the blacks deteriorated at the same pace as your dreams. Instead of being just a nusience, you began to point to them as the source of your problems. Ignoring your own laziness, ignorance, and lack of ambition, you decided that things would be better for you if the blacks [fill in the blank].

...if the blacks weren't on welfare...if the blacks weren't using food stamps...if the blacks didn't get Affirmative Action...if the blacks didn't commit crimes

And now, look at you. You're broke and you're looking for the reason you were unable to turn your white priviledge into financial gain. It must have been the blacks.

here to help:Or they could end the drug war, invest in education, raise minimum wage, do something about the ghetto trap and tighten gun regulations in an intelligent (not reactionary) way to make it harder for these goons to get weapons.

End the drug war? Agreed'invest in education'? Does this in include the thousands of dollars per year per student already spent in DC?tighten gun regulations? More regulations? This is DC, what else would you like done?

DROxINxTHExWIND:Walker: 18, 19, and 20 year old sisters at a club at 2am on a Monday morning. And the mother is living with them in subsidized housing because they are "so poor". I'm gonna go ahead and guess none of them have jobs, because if they did they could afford to live in a non-subsidized housing in a nice neighborhood if they had 4 incomes coming in, even if they were only making minimum wage.

Since we're making random, unsupported assumptions in this thread I'm going to guess that you are a poor white male who lives from check-to-check, but you still think you're in the middle class. Your father is an alcoholic construction worker who never really spent quality time with you because he was too busy threatening your mother to keep away from the neighbor that he suspects she was farking. You did poorly in school because you ran with a bunch of attractive and successful Caucasian-Americans who worshipped the WuTang Clan and smoked their mother's stolen cigarettes. You thought you were hard because you and your little crew used to intimidate other little white kids in the neighborhood but that stopped once you got to your integrated high school and you were around real black people. You studied them, mimicking their moves, their expressions, their slang...you even called your white friends "nubian" because you thought it made you edgy. But, there was always this distance between what you are and what you longed to be that troubled you. You could never get inside that circle and knowing it created a resentment. That resentment festered inside you as you got older and your view of the blacks deteriorated at the same pace as your dreams. Instead of being just a nusience, you began to point to them as the source of your problems. Ignoring your own laziness, ignorance, and lack of ambition, you decided that things would be better for you if the blacks [fill in the blank].

...if the blacks weren't on welfare...if the blacks weren't using food stamps...if the blacks didn't get Affirmative Action...if the blacks didn ...

here to help:doglover: First, start with the women. If women don't fark men who don't duel, all straight men are now duelists. Next, target the gay men, same thing. Now ALL men are duelists.

Secondly, counter the counter culture. Offer legal benefits to dueling and increase penalties to non-dueling violence. In film and movies, make the duelists the cool heroes and the non-duelists the cowardly babyfarkers with chlamydia.

Thirdly, make it lucrative. Good duelists get professional status and their duels are televised on ESPN. Make it the new NBA.

If you set it up right, you'll see random violence like this drop right the fark down. Counterpoint: huge increase in non-random violence, but that's much preferable to kids getting shot by strangers.

Or they could end the drug war, invest in education, raise minimum wage, do something about the ghetto trap and tighten gun regulations in an intelligent (not reactionary) way to make it harder for these goons to get weapons.

But I mean across the board gun control at the federal level that covers all states so it's just as hard to get them elsewhere. Local restrictions are useless because people just bring them in from other districts/states. It's not like you have to go through a checkpoint like crossing the border into Mexico/Canada. Even if there were they'd still slip through.

Now I'm sure you'll go into some tirade which I will completely ignore. Have a nice day!

pedrop357:tighten gun regulations? More regulations? This is DC, what else would you like done?

Don't be obtuse. It isn't like the borders between different states, including the District, are a barrier for anything. The original reference to gun regulations certainly refers to national efforts to eliminate the private sale loopholes, break black markets, and prosecute strawman purchases which are used to arm criminals. Cheap guns and easy access to them is certainly a contributing factor to crime in urban areas.

Also FUR is the most ghetto club in DC. Some have speculated it exists solely to attractive stupid rich college girls so they can either be pickpocketed, mugged, and/or raped after they leave drunk and stand next to the projects and wait for a cabbie that will never show up.

But hey, there's a line around the block so it's gotta be awesome, right?!

here to help:doglover: You want to end the drug war and start the gun war.

I don't believe in a full ban. Just some common sense of which there is very little from either side of the debate. Also it would have a chance of actually SAVING lives instead taking them.

There is no causation between gun control and violent crime. There isn't even a correlation. So.... Let's take away bill of rights freedoms without any reason!

Know what IS correlated to violent crime? Significant differences in median income in geographically proximate neighborhoods. But hey, legislating zoning laws that require certain incomes to live in certain areas, and geographically aligning the poor people next to slightly less poor people, and the rich people next to slightly less rich people, wouldn't be as cool as gunning for gun control.

nickerj1:here to help: doglover: You want to end the drug war and start the gun war.

I don't believe in a full ban. Just some common sense of which there is very little from either side of the debate. Also it would have a chance of actually SAVING lives instead taking them.

There is no causation between gun control and violent crime. There isn't even a correlation. So.... Let's take away bill of rights freedoms without any reason!

Know what IS correlated to violent crime? Significant differences in median income in geographically proximate neighborhoods. But hey, legislating zoning laws that require certain incomes to live in certain areas, and geographically aligning the poor people next to slightly less poor people, and the rich people next to slightly less rich people, wouldn't be as cool as gunning for gun control.

nickerj1:There is no causation between gun control and violent crime. There isn't even a correlation. So.... Let's take away bill of rights freedoms without any reason!

Know what IS correlated to violent crime? Significant differences in median income in geographically proximate neighborhoods. But hey, legislating zoning laws that require certain incomes to live in certain areas, and geographically aligning the poor people next to slightly less poor people, and the rich people next to slightly less rich people, wouldn't be as cool as gunning for gun control.

Uh... I said all that crap too. There is no one solution fix but fixing the gun laws so they actually DO what they are supposed to do (which is ideally keep them out of the hands of violent lunatics) is part of it. But good for you... pedrop didn't come back with some "FREEEEDUMZZ!!1" whargarble so it's nice you covered it for him.

Seriously, guys... 90% of the folks pushing for some new gun control legislation are NOT in favor of a full ban. They want loopholes closed, consistency across state lines and accountability for irresponsible behavior. If you stopped screaming for two god damned seconds you might actually know that.

DROxINxTHExWIND:nickerj1: here to help: doglover: You want to end the drug war and start the gun war.

I don't believe in a full ban. Just some common sense of which there is very little from either side of the debate. Also it would have a chance of actually SAVING lives instead taking them.

There is no causation between gun control and violent crime. There isn't even a correlation. So.... Let's take away bill of rights freedoms without any reason!

Know what IS correlated to violent crime? Significant differences in median income in geographically proximate neighborhoods. But hey, legislating zoning laws that require certain incomes to live in certain areas, and geographically aligning the poor people next to slightly less poor people, and the rich people next to slightly less rich people, wouldn't be as cool as gunning for gun control.

Some factors that are known to affect the volume and type of crime occurring from place to place are:Population density and degree of urbanizationVariations in composition of the population, particularly youth concentrationStability of the population with respect to residents' mobility, commuting patterns, and transient factorsEconomic conditions, including median income, poverty level, and job availabilityModes of transportation and highway systems.Cultural factors and educational, recreational, and religious characteristicsFamily conditions with respect to divorce and family cohesivenessClimateEffective strength of law enforcement agenciesAdministrative and investigative emphases on law enforcementPolicies of other components of the criminal justice system(i.e., prosecutorial, judicial,correctional, and probational).Citizens' attitudes toward crime.Crime reporting practices of the citizenry.

See anything on the list? *cough* income inequality *cough* What about things not on the list? *cough* gun control *cough*

nickerj1:DROxINxTHExWIND: nickerj1: here to help: doglover: You want to end the drug war and start the gun war.

I don't believe in a full ban. Just some common sense of which there is very little from either side of the debate. Also it would have a chance of actually SAVING lives instead taking them.

There is no causation between gun control and violent crime. There isn't even a correlation. So.... Let's take away bill of rights freedoms without any reason!

Know what IS correlated to violent crime? Significant differences in median income in geographically proximate neighborhoods. But hey, legislating zoning laws that require certain incomes to live in certain areas, and geographically aligning the poor people next to slightly less poor people, and the rich people next to slightly less rich people, wouldn't be as cool as gunning for gun control.

From the Institute of Pulled from the Ass Statistics or IPAS.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr-statistics-their-proper-use

Some factors that are known to affect the volume and type of crime occurring from place to place are:Population density and degree of urbanizationVariations in composition of the population, particularly youth concentrationStability of the population with respect to residents' mobility, commuting patterns, and transient factorsEconomic conditions, including median income, poverty level, and job availability

Good try, champ. That's not what you said. You tried to make a connection between violent crime and the intermingling of poor and rich people. YOUR position was that violent crime happens BECAUSE you have neighborhoods where rich and the not so rich live near each other. The highlighted sentence says, "when people are poor they may be more likely to commit crime". Those are two totally different things and I actually agree with the SECOND point. That was pretty disingenuous.

here to help:nickerj1: There is no causation between gun control and violent crime. There isn't even a correlation. So.... Let's take away bill of rights freedoms without any reason!

Know what IS correlated to violent crime? Significant differences in median income in geographically proximate neighborhoods. But hey, legislating zoning laws that require certain incomes to live in certain areas, and geographically aligning the poor people next to slightly less poor people, and the rich people next to slightly less rich people, wouldn't be as cool as gunning for gun control.

Uh... I said all that crap too. There is no one solution fix but fixing the gun laws so they actually DO what they are supposed to do (which is ideally keep them out of the hands of violent lunatics) is part of it. But good for you... pedrop didn't come back with some "FREEEEDUMZZ!!1" whargarble so it's nice you covered it for him.

Seriously, guys... 90% of the folks pushing for some new gun control legislation are NOT in favor of a full ban. They want loopholes closed, consistency across state lines and accountability for irresponsible behavior. If you stopped screaming for two god damned seconds you might actually know that.

Define "loophole".

Also consistency across state lines regarding what, exactly? Purchasing of firearms? Cause that's already federalized.Regarding possession and carrying? Cause that's almost consistent across the entire nation, 42 states are shall issue (or more free) CCW states. The exceptions of course being Cali, NY, Illinois, MD, and a handful of others. Regarding lethal self defense and brandishing laws? Cause they are almost universal across every state with castle doctrines and brandishing being illegal. There's a few exceptions with FL's stand-your-ground, but generally most are on the same page. So what is exactly "inconsistent" between the states?

DROxINxTHExWIND:Good try, champ. That's not what you said. You tried to make a connection between violent crime and the intermingling of poor and rich people. YOUR position was that violent crime happens BECAUSE you have neighborhoods where rich and the not so rich live near each other. The highlighted sentence says, "when people are poor they may be more likely to commit crime". Those are two totally different things and I actually agree with the SECOND point. That was pretty disingenuous.

Yanno... I totally misread what he said. I thought he was implying that if poor people weren't so isolated things might get better but he was saying the opposite. What segregationist dillhole.

DROxINxTHExWIND:nickerj1: DROxINxTHExWIND: nickerj1: here to help: doglover: You want to end the drug war and start the gun war.

I don't believe in a full ban. Just some common sense of which there is very little from either side of the debate. Also it would have a chance of actually SAVING lives instead taking them.

There is no causation between gun control and violent crime. There isn't even a correlation. So.... Let's take away bill of rights freedoms without any reason!

Know what IS correlated to violent crime? Significant differences in median income in geographically proximate neighborhoods. But hey, legislating zoning laws that require certain incomes to live in certain areas, and geographically aligning the poor people next to slightly less poor people, and the rich people next to slightly less rich people, wouldn't be as cool as gunning for gun control.

From the Institute of Pulled from the Ass Statistics or IPAS.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr-statistics-their-proper-use

Some factors that are known to affect the volume and type of crime occurring from place to place are:Population density and degree of urbanizationVariations in composition of the population, particularly youth concentrationStability of the population with respect to residents' mobility, commuting patterns, and transient factorsEconomic conditions, including median income, poverty level, and job availability

Good try, champ. That's not what you said. You tried to make a connection between violent crime and the intermingling of poor and rich people. YOUR position was that violent crime happens BECAUSE you have neighborhoods where rich and the not so rich live near each other. The highlighted sentence says, "when people are poor they may be more likely to commit crime". Those are two totally different things and I actually agree with the SECOND point. That was pretty disingenuous.

Apparently you didn't read any of the thousands of articles in that Google Scholar search of "income inequality and violent crime" supporting my original statement. But hey, I didn't figure you to be too smart in the first place.

DROxINxTHExWIND:Since we're making random, unsupported assumptions in this thread I'm going to guess that you are a poor white male who lives from check-to-check, but you still think you're in the middle class. Your father is an alcoholic construction worker who never really spent quality time with you because he was too busy threatening your mother to keep away from the neighbor that he suspects she was farking. You did poorly in school because you ran with a bunch of attractive and successful Caucasian-Americans who worshipped the WuTang Clan and smoked their mother's stolen cigarettes. You thought you were hard because you and your little crew used to intimidate other little white kids in the neighborhood but that stopped once you got to your integrated high school and you were around real black people. You studied them, mimicking their moves, their expressions, their slang...you even called your white friends "nubian" because you thought it made you edgy. But, there was always this distance between what you are and what you longed to be that troubled you. You could never get inside that circle and knowing it created a resentment. That resentment festered inside you as you got older and your view of the blacks deteriorated at the same pace as your dreams. Instead of being just a nusience, you began to point to them as the source of your problems. Ignoring your own laziness, ignorance, and lack of ambition, you decided that things would be better for you if the blacks [fill in the blank].

nickerj1:DROxINxTHExWIND: nickerj1: DROxINxTHExWIND: nickerj1: here to help: doglover: You want to end the drug war and start the gun war.

I don't believe in a full ban. Just some common sense of which there is very little from either side of the debate. Also it would have a chance of actually SAVING lives instead taking them.

There is no causation between gun control and violent crime. There isn't even a correlation. So.... Let's take away bill of rights freedoms without any reason!

Know what IS correlated to violent crime? Significant differences in median income in geographically proximate neighborhoods. But hey, legislating zoning laws that require certain incomes to live in certain areas, and geographically aligning the poor people next to slightly less poor people, and the rich people next to slightly less rich people, wouldn't be as cool as gunning for gun control.

From the Institute of Pulled from the Ass Statistics or IPAS.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr-statistics-their-proper-use

Some factors that are known to affect the volume and type of crime occurring from place to place are:Population density and degree of urbanizationVariations in composition of the population, particularly youth concentrationStability of the population with respect to residents' mobility, commuting patterns, and transient factorsEconomic conditions, including median income, poverty level, and job availability

Good try, champ. That's not what you said. You tried to make a connection between violent crime and the intermingling of poor and rich people. YOUR position was that violent crime happens BECAUSE you have neighborhoods where rich and the not so rich live near each other. The highlighted sentence says, "when people are poor they may be more likely to commit crime". Those are two totally different things and I actually agree with the SECOND point. That was pretty disingenuous.

Apparently you didn't read any of the thousands of articles in that Google Scholar se ...

No, I read the highlighted part of your post that was suppsoed to make a point that it didn't make. A smarter person would have, I don't know, posted the relevant information. Unless, their bullshiat point just got destroyed. Then, they'd probably just act like the information to support their made up garbage is really buried somewhere in a link. You know, like you're doing now.

No. I don't argue with selfish froth factories like yourself anymore. There is no discussion. You guys just keep hammering away until you think you've won some points when in reality you've done nothing but antagonize rational people looking for rational solutions.

I love how this all started with one little phrase at the end of a laundry list of potential solutions to poverty and drug fueled violence. You want to leave the gun laws lax? Then deal with all those other socio/economic issues and maybe there wouldn't be a need to tighten the laws.

But I mean across the board gun control at the federal level that covers all states so it's just as hard to get them elsewhere. Local restrictions are useless because people just bring them in from other districts/states. It's not like you have to go through a checkpoint like crossing the border into Mexico/Canada. Even if there were they'd still slip through.

Now I'm sure you'll go into some tirade which I will completely ignore. Have a nice day!

We should use all the regulations on drugs as a model for gun control. I mean with it's stellar record of success who could possibly object to prohibition being applied to guns.

No. I don't argue with selfish froth factories like yourself anymore. There is no discussion. You guys just keep hammering away until you think you've won some points when in reality you've done nothing but antagonize rational people looking for rational solutions.

I love how this all started with one little phrase at the end of a laundry list of potential solutions to poverty and drug fueled violence. You want to leave the gun laws lax? Then deal with all those other socio/economic issues and maybe there wouldn't be a need to tighten the laws.

I've asked you to present more definite arguments, because arguments like "close loopholes" and "make states consistent" mean nothing if you don't tell us what the loopholes are or the inconsistencies are. I'm respectfully requesting you clearly articulate your proposed changes with definite language and, of course, a rationale for your changes. Your response of "I won't argue with you" is unpersuasive.